A report on the War Crime Committee’s ‘Yemen, Syria & Afghanistan: Case Studies in International Law, Peace, Justice, and Sanctions in Armed Conflict’ conference, which took place on 27 Jun 2023 in London.
Released on Aug 3, 2023
Over 120 participants attended a panel hosted by the War Crimes Committee of the International Bar Association (IBA) on Thurs, 8 December 2022 to discuss Guantánamo Bay from an international humanitarian and criminal law perspective.
Released on Dec 21, 2022
Released on Nov 25, 2022
Many persons, whether civilian or otherwise hors de combat, remain detained by all sides to the conflict in Yemen. Their detention potentially violates several established provisions of international humanitarian law, international human rights law and may violate international criminal law. These detainees are reportedly kept in crowded and unsanitary conditions, thereby heightening the risks they face in light of the Covid-19 pandemic.
Released on Dec 1, 2021
Over the past two years, the IBA’s War Crimes Committee has been actively involved in efforts to strengthen the drafts of two major multilateral conventions focused on atrocity crimes. The first is the International Law Commission’s articles on the Prevention and Punishment of Crimes Against Humanity, which could form the basis for the world’s first multilateral convention on the crime. The second is a state-led effort to create a multilateral convention on mutual legal assistance and extradition
Released on Jun 21, 2018
Acts perpetrated during the course of warfare often lead to significant environmental destruction, particularly where the natural environment is intentionally targeted as a ‘victim’ or is somehow manipulated to serve as a ‘weapon’. Until recently, such acts were generally regarded as an unfortunate but unavoidable element of armed conflict. The existing international humanitarian law rules have done little to deter deliberate environmental destruction, particularly when measured against perceived military
In this article the authors discuss whether the KSC will follow the ICTY in interpreting article 16.1 of its statute to embrace the wide constructed liability of JCE III. They suggest there are good reasons why it should not: the terms of article 16.1 of the KSC Statute do not explicitly provide for JCE III. The ICTY Appeals Chamber read JCE III liability into article 7.1 of the ICTY Statute on the basis that it was ‘firmly established in customary international law’, yet JCE III has proved controversial a
The Covid-19 pandemic has heightened the risk of food insecurity and starvation, particularly in conflict-affected states. Governments and other organised groups should be held to account if they unduly restrict essential supplies from reaching populations in need.